bonus: two forms you can use.
by marc rosenberg
the rosenberg practice management library
why do firms conduct performance evaluations of partners?
- to clarify what is expected of the partner
- to improve performance
- to provide management with information to use in allocating partner income, which should be linked to performance
more: compensation is no way to manage partners | make sure partners focus on two things | entitled rainmakers and other practice development errors | breaking it down: marketing job descriptions | how and why to hire a marketing director | how to brand and differentiate your firm
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
five types of partner evaluations
- self-evaluation
- upward evaluations of the partners by the staff
- client satisfaction and loyalty surveys
- peer evaluations
- traditional one-on-one appraisal sessions, same as for staff
larger firms use evaluations more than smaller firms. this is because larger firms tend to have more sophisticated management practices, including partner accountability, which is one of several techniques for managing partner behavior and conduct. smaller firms often avoid partner evaluations because they struggle with partner accountability. that’s not good, but that’s the life they lead.
- self-evaluations. the self-evaluation can be a standalone tool distributed to the partners to fill out. or better yet, it can be the start of a traditional performance appraisal.
- upward evaluations of the partners by the staff. the #1 reason staff leave firms is dissatisfaction with their boss. at most cpa firms, the partners are the primary bosses. any firm that is serious about developing excellent staff and making their firm a great place to work must get feedback from the staff on how they see the partners and managers and what it’s like to work for them. upward evaluations help management assess the partners’ and managers’ effectiveness with staff. equally important, they help partners identify aspects of their supervisory style and conduct that need improvement.
yet many firms are reluctant to conduct upward evaluations. the reason is obvious: some partners fear receiving weak evaluations, especially from staff, whom a partner may deem unworthy or unable to provide a fair evaluation. the truth hurts, and the partners who need to hear it the most resist it the most.
as the following data (from a recent rosenberg map survey) shows, more large firms than small ones are committed to upward evaluations:
- firms over $20 million: 73% do them
- $10-$20 million: 55%
- $2-$10 million: 31%
- under $2 million: 13%
skeptics of upward evaluations feel the staff are not mature enough to evaluate partners properly:
- when an angry, immature staff person performs poorly on an engagement and receives a weak evaluation by a partner, the staff person may avenge the poor grade by giving the partner a weak evaluation.
- some young staff are slow to learn how a professional behaves in a business environment. they may resent a partner’s attempts to teach them proper conduct and rate the partner poorly because of them.
- personality differences occur in all walks of life. there are bound to be situations where such clashes occur between partners and staff.
- staff may be reluctant to complete honest evaluations for fear that the partners (their bosses!) will somehow find out what they said. this is especially true when the team is small, and the result could be inflated ratings.
my responses to the skeptics:
- yes, some staff will unfairly evaluate a partner. the cure is for the firm to be large enough to generate enough evaluations (at least five or six) for each partner to minimize the impact of one inaccurate rating. if fewer evaluations are generated for each partner, the firm may wish to reconsider conducting upward evaluations.
- i have conducted dozens of upward evaluations. in every one of them, those partners who received low grades acknowledged the validity of the evaluations.
the key to conducting any kind of survey effectively is to use methodology that yields valid results. here are steps that firms should take to ensure effective upward evaluation results:
- anonymity and confidentiality must be guaranteed.
- the survey must be tabulated by an outside organization or person instead of internal personnel.
- at least 95 percent participation by your staff is needed.
- staff should evaluate only partners they worked for. never allow staff to rely on hearsay in evaluating partners.
- results for partners who receive only two or three evaluations should be discarded, because it may be obvious who said what.
- client satisfaction and loyalty surveys. these measure clients’ satisfaction and loyalty to the firm and identify ways to serve them better. along with staff, clients are the major group that partners need to interact with effectively.
- peer evaluations. the first three forms of evaluation are suitable for firms of all sizes. but peer evaluations are more commonly used at smaller firms, say, five or fewer partners, where the partners know each other well enough to evaluate their peers. once firms get larger than five or so partners, evaluating peers properly becomes more difficult. see the sample form at the end of this post.
- traditional one-on-one appraisal sessions. an appraisal session is convened to review the partner’s overall performance, not just with clients and staff but in other important areas, such as achieving goals and production targets and intangible performance attributes. the evaluation is performed by a supervising partner, such as the managing partner, pic (partner in charge) or practice group leader. some firms appoint two partners to conduct this appraisal session jointly.
like staff, partners being reviewed should complete a self-evaluation form, which they discuss with the reviewing partner. here is a sample form:
partner self-evaluation form
- production statistics. summarize your year and evaluate your numbers: good, not good, just ok, etc:
- billable hours, including realization
- business brought in, both from new clients and cross-selling to existing clients
- size of client base, including retention of clients
- realization, write-offs, bad debts; age of wip, a/r
- do your production statistics tell the full story of your contributions to the firm? give examples.
- summarize your performance in the following areas:
- the technical quality of your work
- development of new markets, services, specialties
- staff retention, development, mentoring and recruiting. explain the positive impact you made in these areas. list staff and partners who advanced under your tutelage and what you did to make this happen.
- business development activity. what efforts did you make to bring in business for the firm? list articles, speeches, seminars, civic and charitable activity.
- describe your efforts to build a team under you instead of practicing mostly as a solo.
- client retention. what you did to retain your clients. if you leave, will your clients stay? why?
- have you moved clients’ work upscale?
- list any special accomplishments during the year.
- if your partners listed areas of your performance that need improvement, what would they say?
- how well have you achieved your written goals?
partner performance evaluation peer evaluation form
please evaluate your partners. place a check in one box per line. if you can’t answer the question, write in n/a.
partner doing the evaluation __________________________
partner receiving the evaluation __________________________
| how satisfied are you with the partner’s performance? | ||||||
| very satisfied | satisfied | slightly satisfied | slightly dissatisfied | dissatisfied | very dissatisfied | |
| does partner help staff learn and grow? | ||||||
| timeliness of billing, timesheets, collections, client work, scheduling personnel and review of work? | ||||||
| respect for others? | ||||||
| business development results? | ||||||
| team player? | ||||||
| follows firm’s policies? | ||||||
| timely response to emails, voice mails, etc.? | ||||||